Page 1 of 3

"Proof" that republicans are racist

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 2:30 pm
by Stevicat
Study Ties Political Leanings to Hidden Biases

By Shankar Vedantam
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, January 30, 2006; A05



Put a group of people together at a party and observe how they behave. Differently than when they are alone? Differently than when they are with family? What if they're in a stadium instead of at a party? What if they're all men?

The field of social psychology has long been focused on how social environments affect the way people behave. But social psychologists are people, too, and as the United States has become increasingly politically polarized, they have grown increasingly interested in examining what drives these sharp divides: red states vs. blue states; pro-Iraq war vs. anti-Iraq war; pro-same-sex marriage vs. anti-same-sex marriage. And they have begun to study political behavior using such specialized tools as sophisticated psychological tests and brain scans.

"In my own family, for example, there are stark differences, not just of opinion but very profound differences in how we view the world," said Brenda Major, a psychologist at the University of California at Santa Barbara and the president of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, which had a conference last week that showcased several provocative psychological studies about the nature of political belief.

The new interest has yielded some results that will themselves provoke partisan reactions: Studies presented at the conference, for example, produced evidence that emotions and implicit assumptions often influence why people choose their political affiliations, and that partisans stubbornly discount any information that challenges their preexisting beliefs.

Emory University psychologist Drew Westen put self-identified Democratic and Republican partisans in brain scanners and asked them to evaluate negative information about various candidates. Both groups were quick to spot inconsistency and hypocrisy -- but only in candidates they opposed.

When presented with negative information about the candidates they liked, partisans of all stripes found ways to discount it, Westen said. When the unpalatable information was rejected, furthermore, the brain scans showed that volunteers gave themselves feel-good pats -- the scans showed that "reward centers" in volunteers' brains were activated. The psychologist observed that the way these subjects dealt with unwelcome information had curious parallels with drug addiction as addicts also reward themselves for wrong-headed behavior.

Another study presented at the conference, which was in Palm Springs, Calif., explored relationships between racial bias and political affiliation by analyzing self-reported beliefs, voting patterns and the results of psychological tests that measure implicit attitudes -- subtle stereotypes people hold about various groups.

That study found that supporters of President Bush and other conservatives had stronger self-admitted and implicit biases against blacks than liberals did.

"What automatic biases reveal is that while we have the feeling we are living up to our values, that feeling may not be right," said University of Virginia psychologist Brian Nosek, who helped conduct the race analysis. "We are not aware of everything that causes our behavior, even things in our own lives."

Brian Jones, a spokesman for the Republican National Committee, said he disagreed with the study's conclusions but that it was difficult to offer a detailed critique, as the research had not yet been published and he could not review the methodology. He also questioned whether the researchers themselves had implicit biases -- against Republicans -- noting that Nosek and Harvard psychologist Mahzarin Banaji had given campaign contributions to Democrats.

"There are a lot of factors that go into political affiliation, and snap determinations may be interesting for an academic study, but the real-world application seems somewhat murky," Jones said.

Nosek said that though the risk of bias among researchers was "a reasonable question," the study provided empirical results that could -- and would -- be tested by other groups: "All we did was compare questions that people could answer any way they wanted," Nosek said, as he explained why he felt personal views could not have influenced the outcome. "We had no direct contact with participants."

For their study, Nosek, Banaji and social psychologist Erik Thompson culled self-acknowledged views about blacks from nearly 130,000 whites, who volunteered online to participate in a widely used test of racial bias that measures the speed of people's associations between black or white faces and positive or negative words. The researchers examined correlations between explicit and implicit attitudes and voting behavior in all 435 congressional districts.

The analysis found that substantial majorities of Americans, liberals and conservatives, found it more difficult to associate black faces with positive concepts than white faces -- evidence of implicit bias. But districts that registered higher levels of bias systematically produced more votes for Bush.

"Obviously, such research does not speak at all to the question of the prejudice level of the president," said Banaji, "but it does show that George W. Bush is appealing as a leader to those Americans who harbor greater anti-black prejudice."

Vincent Hutchings, a political scientist at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, said the results matched his own findings in a study he conducted ahead of the 2000 presidential election: Volunteers shown visual images of blacks in contexts that implied they were getting welfare benefits were far more receptive to Republican political ads decrying government waste than volunteers shown ads with the same message but without images of black people.

Jon Krosnick, a psychologist and political scientist at Stanford University, who independently assessed the studies, said it remains to be seen how significant the correlation is between racial bias and political affiliation.

For example, he said, the study could not tell whether racial bias was a better predictor of voting preference than, say, policy preferences on gun control or abortion. But while those issues would be addressed in subsequent studies -- Krosnick plans to get random groups of future voters to take the psychological tests and discuss their policy preferences -- he said the basic correlation was not in doubt.

"If anyone in Washington is skeptical about these findings, they are in denial," he said. "We have 50 years of evidence that racial prejudice predicts voting. Republicans are supported by whites with prejudice against blacks. If people say, 'This takes me aback,' they are ignoring a huge volume of research."

Re: "Proof" that republicans are racist

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 2:42 pm
by Grizlaw
Stevicat wrote:Brian Jones, a spokesman for the Republican National Committee, said he disagreed with the study's conclusions but that it was difficult to offer a detailed critique, as the research had not yet been published and he could not review the methodology.
I love statements like this one: "I disagree with the study's conclusions, but I cannot articulate why I disagree because it has not been published yet."

Great, Brian. I'm glad to hear that the fact that the study is unpublished has not stopped you from determining, unequivocally, that you disagree with it. :thumbup:

--GL (what a tool...)

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 2:42 pm
by SonomaCat
Not to piss people off too much ... but we don't need a study to figure that out. Even most Republicans would admit that their party has more racists within it than the Democrats.

That is NOT to say that being a Republican makes you a racist. It's merely that those people who are racist tend to misconstrue the Republican platform to mean that minorities are bad, even when the real reason for the platform has nothing to do with race.

Not to mention that the whole "Southern Strategy" orchestrated by the Republicans beginning with the Nixon campaign recruited voters who were specifically targeted for their racial preferences. A component of the party may still reflect that mindset.

For example, most Republicans are for small government for economic reasons. A racist could look at this and, ignoring the fact that he and his entire family are likely on public assistance (as your garden variety bigot is generally not a very successful person), buy into stereotype that social programs only benefit minorities, and he's tired of "his" hard-earned tax dollars going to "those people." Therefore, he's a Republican for racist reasons.

Although I think it is perfectly compatible to be a Republican and a non-racist person. That's what most of them are.

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 2:58 pm
by catamaran
I'm never quite sure where the connection between the Republican Party and racism came from....Abe Lincoln (R-Illinois)....Civil Rights Act stymied by Southern Democrats....etc

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 3:02 pm
by Grizlaw
catamaran wrote:I'm never quite sure where the connection between the Republican Party and racism came from....
The fact that Dubya went out of his way to make a campaign speech at a university that, at the time, didn't allow interracial dating during his 2000 primary campaign probably didn't help matters...

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 3:04 pm
by SonomaCat
catamaran wrote:I'm never quite sure where the connection between the Republican Party and racism came from....Abe Lincoln (R-Illinois)....Civil Rights Act stymied by Southern Democrats....etc
True. Prior to the 1970s, the Republicans were the party of civil rights. The Democratics Party was essentially operated by the KKK in many/most parts of the country in the 1920s, and was largely the segregation party in the South through the 1960s.

Then came the "Southern Strategy," where the Republicans used the guise of arguing for strong "states rights" as a euphemism for the southern distaste for the federal inverntion that led to the crushing of all of their Jim Crow laws. With that, the south started to vote Republican, and blacks virtually all went Democrat. And that's where we are today ... where anyone driving a pickup in Alabama with a Dixie flag in it is almost certainly going to be a Republican.

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 3:13 pm
by SonomaCat
Grizlaw wrote:
catamaran wrote:I'm never quite sure where the connection between the Republican Party and racism came from....
The fact that Dubya went out of his way to make a campaign speech at a university that, at the time, didn't allow interracial dating during his 2000 primary campaign probably didn't help matters...
I always knew there was a reason why I never felt the urge to apply to Bob Jones U. Besides the fact that their football team sucks, of course. :wink:

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 3:16 pm
by Ponycat
Grizlaw wrote:
catamaran wrote:I'm never quite sure where the connection between the Republican Party and racism came from....
The fact that Dubya went out of his way to make a campaign speech at a university that, at the time, didn't allow interracial dating during his 2000 primary campaign probably didn't help matters...
Or the fact that he has had more minorities in higher positions than any other president.

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 3:19 pm
by mslacat
PROOF! Do we really need proof!

Republican = Racism
as
Democrats = Anti American
as
Sadam = Terrorists

Aren't these already established as facts.

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 3:20 pm
by SonomaCat
Ponycat wrote:
Grizlaw wrote:
catamaran wrote:I'm never quite sure where the connection between the Republican Party and racism came from....
The fact that Dubya went out of his way to make a campaign speech at a university that, at the time, didn't allow interracial dating during his 2000 primary campaign probably didn't help matters...
Or the fact that he has had more minorities in higher positions than any other president.
Yeah, Harry Belafonte had a theory on that one ... a theory that disgusted me personally.

One of the things that really did encourage me during Bush's initial days in office was the care they took to make the cabinet inclusive. I hoped that it would truly lead to more diversity within the Republican Party -- not only in terms of skin tone, but much more importantly, in terms of ideas and perspectives. Judging by polls alone, that hasn't really happened in large part, but it may be a lagging indicator that we won't notice until sometime in the future.

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 3:29 pm
by Grizlaw
Ponycat wrote:Or the fact that he has had more minorities in higher positions than any other president.
True -- that's a sign of the times; it will probably be the case that all future presidents will place more minorities in positions of power than presidents have in the past. That will happen naturally simply because minorities have gained power in society at large.

It still doesn't change the fact that Bush used Southern racism (by speaking at Bob Jones U.) to score him points in the primary race against McCain, though. That will always be true, no matter how hard anyone tries to deflect attention away from it by pointing to the number of minorities he has in his cabinet.

--GL

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 4:26 pm
by ChiOCat
Bay Area Cat wrote:Not to piss people off too much ... but we don't need a study to figure that out. Even most Republicans would admit that their party has more racists within it than the Democrats.

That is NOT to say that being a Republican makes you a racist. It's merely that those people who are racist tend to misconstrue the Republican platform to mean that minorities are bad, even when the real reason for the platform has nothing to do with race.

Not to mention that the whole "Southern Strategy" orchestrated by the Republicans beginning with the Nixon campaign recruited voters who were specifically targeted for their racial preferences. A component of the party may still reflect that mindset.

For example, most Republicans are for small government for economic reasons. A racist could look at this and, ignoring the fact that he and his entire family are likely on public assistance (as your garden variety bigot is generally not a very successful person), buy into stereotype that social programs only benefit minorities, and he's tired of "his" hard-earned tax dollars going to "those people." Therefore, he's a Republican for racist reasons.

Although I think it is perfectly compatible to be a Republican and a non-racist person. That's what most of them are.
Guess what? I whole heartedly disagree.

Lets use Katrina as an example. We were all horrified how bad it got, and that there were so many PEOPLE stranded with no way out, no food, no water. They were PEOPLE till the likes of Al Sharpton (A Liberal, no?) shouted out "why does no one care that these are poor black people?"

Because we were too busy worrying about the PEOPLE. It did not change the situation that they were poor black people. Too many times, the racial issue is raised, and usually to a detriment of the situtation.

For the most part, Republicans get labeled as racist because they don't take race into account. People are people and they have to earn things on their own individual merits. And that doesn't sit well with those that think some races deserve to have things handed to them on a silver platter. Therefore, we are racist.

And yes, as a female engineer I was more than once told that I would get a job. Because I'm a girl, and they needed to fill the quota. And it always pissed me off. I did not want to be hired because I was a girl, but because I was the right person. Nor did it sit well with me that I could accuse my boss of sexual harrasement if I didn't like him, and there was very little that he could do about it.

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 4:39 pm
by Ponycat
ChiOCat wrote:
Bay Area Cat wrote:Not to piss people off too much ... but we don't need a study to figure that out. Even most Republicans would admit that their party has more racists within it than the Democrats.

That is NOT to say that being a Republican makes you a racist. It's merely that those people who are racist tend to misconstrue the Republican platform to mean that minorities are bad, even when the real reason for the platform has nothing to do with race.

Not to mention that the whole "Southern Strategy" orchestrated by the Republicans beginning with the Nixon campaign recruited voters who were specifically targeted for their racial preferences. A component of the party may still reflect that mindset.

For example, most Republicans are for small government for economic reasons. A racist could look at this and, ignoring the fact that he and his entire family are likely on public assistance (as your garden variety bigot is generally not a very successful person), buy into stereotype that social programs only benefit minorities, and he's tired of "his" hard-earned tax dollars going to "those people." Therefore, he's a Republican for racist reasons.

Although I think it is perfectly compatible to be a Republican and a non-racist person. That's what most of them are.
Guess what? I whole heartedly disagree.

Lets use Katrina as an example. We were all horrified how bad it got, and that there were so many PEOPLE stranded with no way out, no food, no water. They were PEOPLE till the likes of Al Sharpton (A Liberal, no?) shouted out "why does no one care that these are poor black people?"

Because we were too busy worrying about the PEOPLE. It did not change the situation that they were poor black people. Too many times, the racial issue is raised, and usually to a detriment of the situtation.

For the most part, Republicans get labeled as racist because they don't take race into account. People are people and they have to earn things on their own individual merits. And that doesn't sit well with those that think some races deserve to have things handed to them on a silver platter. Therefore, we are racist.

And yes, as a female engineer I was more than once told that I would get a job. Because I'm a girl, and they needed to fill the quota. And it always pissed me off. I did not want to be hired because I was a girl, but because I was the right person. Nor did it sit well with me that I could accuse my boss of sexual harrasement if I didn't like him, and there was very little that he could do about it.
You only believe this because our racist and sexist society has brainwashed you. :roll:

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 4:44 pm
by Grizlaw
Ponycat wrote:
ChiOCat wrote:
Bay Area Cat wrote:Not to piss people off too much ... but we don't need a study to figure that out. Even most Republicans would admit that their party has more racists within it than the Democrats.

That is NOT to say that being a Republican makes you a racist. It's merely that those people who are racist tend to misconstrue the Republican platform to mean that minorities are bad, even when the real reason for the platform has nothing to do with race.

Not to mention that the whole "Southern Strategy" orchestrated by the Republicans beginning with the Nixon campaign recruited voters who were specifically targeted for their racial preferences. A component of the party may still reflect that mindset.

For example, most Republicans are for small government for economic reasons. A racist could look at this and, ignoring the fact that he and his entire family are likely on public assistance (as your garden variety bigot is generally not a very successful person), buy into stereotype that social programs only benefit minorities, and he's tired of "his" hard-earned tax dollars going to "those people." Therefore, he's a Republican for racist reasons.

Although I think it is perfectly compatible to be a Republican and a non-racist person. That's what most of them are.
Guess what? I whole heartedly disagree.

Lets use Katrina as an example. We were all horrified how bad it got, and that there were so many PEOPLE stranded with no way out, no food, no water. They were PEOPLE till the likes of Al Sharpton (A Liberal, no?) shouted out "why does no one care that these are poor black people?"

Because we were too busy worrying about the PEOPLE. It did not change the situation that they were poor black people. Too many times, the racial issue is raised, and usually to a detriment of the situtation.

For the most part, Republicans get labeled as racist because they don't take race into account. People are people and they have to earn things on their own individual merits. And that doesn't sit well with those that think some races deserve to have things handed to them on a silver platter. Therefore, we are racist.

And yes, as a female engineer I was more than once told that I would get a job. Because I'm a girl, and they needed to fill the quota. And it always pissed me off. I did not want to be hired because I was a girl, but because I was the right person. Nor did it sit well with me that I could accuse my boss of sexual harrasement if I didn't like him, and there was very little that he could do about it.
You only believe this because our racist and sexist society has brainwashed you. :roll:
Also because she's a girl, and girls can't think for themselves. ;)

--GL (ducks)

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 4:50 pm
by longhorn_22
Are Republicans really racist because they hate minorities, or because they disagree that people can sit on their asses and get helped out by the Liberals? I have no problem with helping out people that are unable to do anything because of a disability or other problem, but because they are too lazy to get out of the house and get a job or work for something I feel no sympathy.

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 4:51 pm
by SonomaCat
I think what you are referring to is more of a "racial victim mentality" sort of thing than a racist thing. And yes, since nearly all of the minorities are Democrats, in addition to the general trend of Democrats being more open to the idea of a very wide financial safety net, it makes perfect sense that you would see a lot more of this behavior from Democrats.

But it terms of racist attitudes (a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race, per Merriam-Webster), it seems virtually all evidence would suggest that this is more of a problem within the ranks of the Republican Party than the Democratic Party.

Again, though, this certainly doesn't mean that Republicans are inherently racist or that there are no bigots who vote Democrat. It just means that most people who are racist tend to be Republican.

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 4:54 pm
by Ponycat
Howard Dean has said some of the most blatently racist comments I've ever heard but he gets away with it for some damn reason

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 4:54 pm
by SonomaCat
longhorn_22 wrote:Are Republicans really racist because they hate minorities, or because they disagree that people can sit on their asses and get helped out by the Liberals? I have no problem with helping out people that are unable to do anything because of a disability or other problem, but because they are too lazy to get out of the house and get a job or work for something I feel no sympathy.
Ahhh yeah. You gotta be tough on those minorities that are lazy and sit on their asses waiting for handouts. :roll:

If only there was just one lazy poor white people in this country....

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 4:57 pm
by Grizlaw
Ponycat wrote:Howard Dean has said some of the most blatently racist comments I've ever heard but he gets away with it for some damn reason
Do you have any examples? I'm not saying it couldn't be true, but I've certainly never heard Dean say anything worse than what I've heard come out of the mouth of our own Conrad Burns (who has the public use of the word "towelheads" on his resume).

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 4:59 pm
by ChiOCat
Listen here boys!!! I am surrounded by testosterone. I'll bust your balls and smile while I do it :twisted: I've had years of practice.

OK, I'll step out of dominatrix mode now. It doesn't really suit me.